Skip to main content

About your Search

20130216
20130224
STATION
MSNBCW 112
LANGUAGE
English 112
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 112 (some duplicates have been removed)
from it, but it is good for the economy, because if they have extra money in the pocket, they will spend it, and that is held p pful to the -- helpful t the economy, and so businesses will see people coming in with a little extra cash to spend, and we are hoping that with the people behind it, it will put pressure on the congress to do something. >> and we have heard the counter argument that raising the federal minimum wage will reduce the number of jobs available and hurt small businesses.
, honolulu. arguing that investment is needed to grow the economy. those are big military towns. he wants to talk about infrastructure in what he talks about in the state of the union address. note that most of these markets are about military presence, so he wants potential questions about furloughs. white house is calling it a fix it first policy. the president will also revise his call for a private partnership to attract financing. third part of the plan calls for cutting red tape to get permits. >> if we upgrade our infrastructure, that'll bring even more jobs, and that's the attitude of a lot of companies all around the world. and i know you want these job-creating projects in your districts. i've seen those ribbon cuttings. all of this is designed to turn up the pressure on republicans by pushing budget consequences into share backyards. >> border patrol agents will see their hours reduced. fbi agents will be furloughed. federal prosecutors will have to close cases and let criminals go. air traffic controllers and airport security will see cutbacks. they will add hundreds of thousa
be quote as necessary to defense as it is to the national economy and the personal safety. as president, eisenhower set out to gather national support complete with a made-for-tv style campaign ad. >> in this century, america has become a nation on wheels. we ride on wheels to work, to shop, to play, to go about any place we want to go. we depend on wheels to bring us the food we eat and the clothes we wear and the things that we use, but when we depend on wheels, we depend also on highways. >> but of course, as all things in washington tend to go, the 34th president struggled with the lack of consensus. governors, democrat and republican, fought eisenhower e on with what they called his plan for the biggest federal aid programs, calling the republican president to task for running away from his staunch opposition to federal encroachment on state sovereignty. it was in fact the democratic senator from virginia, harry byrd, who tried to block eisenhower's plan, and byrd was known as a pay as you go man, and he had a wild hatred for debt. after a lot of coalition building president dwight
the broader economy and the republicans acknowledge that but are not ready to go back to the negotiating table right now. >> ken, i guess the other point here is that, you know, if the sequester happens and, for example, in "the washington times" today, they talked about the ripple effect on defense contractors and the thousands of jobs that they are preparing to have layoffs for because of the threat of sequester. i mean, who gets the blame if the economy starts to tank? >> right. well, congress gets the blame more generally and that is what i think is sort of lost here in the jockeying, the positioning and pointing fingers at both sides. we already see historic negative approval ratings for congress. it's only going to get down to both parties detriment. however, i do think the president, by virtue of having this bully pulpit we will see him exercise later this morning and presumely for the next several days, does have a little bit of the upper hand here. i'm not sure if it's quite so much that he can convince republicans to accept additional tax increases as perry suggested is very unlikely
. it is not a free lunch, but doesn't slam the economy with a lot of job loss. there may be a little bit of job loss, but not too much. business absorbs the cost, they pass them on to the customers or stockholders in the form of lower profits. so it takes the income in the middle and redistributes it towards the bottom. who knows whether it has a serious chance of passing? but that is a serious chance of passing the inequality. >> and it is kind of a dirty word in american politics. but as i understand the white house's theory at this point in time i think they see the economy has having changed in certain ways, such as a lot of gains are going to keep up with it at the top. and a lot of gains are going to corporate profits. one role for the government to play, that sharing has to come from government policy. they see that as what you need to keep a strong consensus for sort of a pro-growth capitalism. i want to see if you agree with it. >> one of the things i remember talking about in 2008, when very few people knew who austin goolsby, he would say this is a really wonky thing, one thing very impor
' president's day sale on the economy a total bust. tonight the truth on our spending problem. this is "the ed show." let's get to work. >> there you go. good job. >> four years after the stimulus saved us from depression, republicans are dragging us into recession. >> spending is the problem. >> tonight the facts versus republican fantasy on the economy and the sequester. >> we have had a massive cover-up on the part -- >> but a massive cover-up of what? >> john mccain is at it again. >> do you care whether four americans died? >> retired colonel lawrence wilkerson on the blind republican rage over benghazi. >>> the luvgov is hitting the trail again. >> i'm a bottom line kind of guy. it's going to hurt. >> we'll show you his questionable ad. >>> plus, marco rubio disagrees with his own immigration plan because the president likes it. >>> mississippi finally got around to banning slavery this month. >>> and the oscar-nominated movie "silver linings playbook" is shining new light on treating mental illness. director david o. russell joins me tonight for the conversation. good to have you with u
/bowles a serious plan. tonight i'll expose how it's seriously going to kill the economy. liberals, hold your ground. this is "the ed show." let's get to work. >> are you willing to see a bunch of first responders lose their job because you want to protect some special interest tax loophole? >> the president takes his case to the people as the two salesmen for republican austerity are mobbed by protesters. >> pay your share of taxes. >> pay your tax. >> tonight, "time's" michael grunwald, jonathan alter and katrina vanden heuvel on how to dismantle the austerity bomb. >> 10,000 bucks? >>> the godfather of the conservative movement offers romney pocket change to anyone who can save the republican party. i'll show you why it's a lost cause. >>> plus, a virginia pizza shop owner uses a sick promotion to sell pies and push the nra agenda. >>> the beltway press takes their eye off the ball, complaining about bohm and tiger woods. the least popular senator is desperately attacking ashley judd. and david corn, the co-author of "hubris" and co-author of the msnbc documentary tells me what was left out. >> i
right. the cuts are not smart. they're not fair. they're going to hurt the economy. but what the president didn't mention, that the sequester, that was his idea in the first place. >> not smart, not fair. it was his idea? let's keep adding it up, boys. today john boehner fired off his latest shot in this blame game. he took to the pages of the "wall street journal" to accuse the president of the united states of creating a financial crisis. boehner said the president's sequester is now eminent. but the daily beast website released some information today to knock down boehner's accusations. you see, back in 2011, boehner's office developed a power point presentation for house republicans. it was a two-step approach, but it actually contained three steps. first of all, no tax hikes. of course that's typical. spending cuts extending the debt ceiling increase, and spending caps. but while pushing those spending caps, boehner did what? he highlighted a special trigger mechanism -- sequestration. boehner was selling this idea to his caucus as a good way to make sure that they were
put hundreds of thousands of jobs and our entire economy at risk just to protect a few special interest tax loophole that is benefit only the healthiest americans and biggest corporations? that's the choice. >> while the cuts would put the gvt government on a path towards a debt reduction, they are inkrimtat or a lot like a meat clever. it would force the f.a.a. to regularly furlough 4,000 workers a day which accounts for more than 10% of its entire staff. 125,000 families would immediately lose rental assistance putting them at risk of homelessness, and the military's health insurance program would face a $3 billion shortfall, meaning retirees and dependents of active soldiers could lose their coverage. as congress heads into the frantic sprint to the deadline next week, how much influence will president obama have on republicans? a month ago the president signalled he would be doing more outreach towards capitol hill or at least more in-home entertaining. >> personal relationships are important, and obviously i can always do a better job and the nice thing is that now that my
world when you decide chopping down the government and hurting the economy is the smart move. but bring it all down is now the hard right battle cry. slash spending, short the pentagon. crew up traffic control whatever raises the noise level, bashes the democrats and lowers hope. is this the tea party dream? is this john boehner's version of feeding time at the zoo, giving the crazies what they want so they will sit in their seats and behave? is this final payment to insanity the last vestige of what calm republicanism is ready to cough up? but how else can you explain the readiness of the gop leadership to let this fraken stein's monster, it doomsday machine, this sequestration go all out berserk? how else can we understand the party of lincoln doing such economic damage to the republic, such damage and moral to the people. democrat ed rendell and republican michael steele. gentlemen, i want to start with you, michael, because i know you will disagree with me and that's what this is about. i read a lot of good reporting today, not analysis, but good reporting from your side of the aisl
, but will lowering tax rates create a stronger american middle class, a morrow bust economy? fans of history, facts, and economic data question the merits of trickle down economics. since ronald reagan took office, the government has eased the tax burden on the wealthiest americans. the result of three decades of tax cutting, according to a cbo report that republicans tried desperately to kill, "there is not conclusive evidence to substantiate a clear relationship between the 65-year steady reduction in the top tax rates and economic growth." so what is the legacy of the last three decades? staggering income disparity. the average household income has skyrocketed for the top 1% far outpacing the modest gains by the bottom 99%. in 2010 93% of income gains went to the top 1%. in 2011 the average .01%er made $23 million. that same year the average member of the bottom 90% made $30,000. according to the washington post given the gaping difference in income, it was hard to graph the disparity on the same chart. the past month and a half has shown just how vulnerable the middle and working class remain.
the economy or create jobs, it will eviscerate the job-creating investments. >> just ten days left to prevent $85 billion in spending cuts. >> the sequester. >> the sequester. >> the sequester. >> it won't consider whether we're cutting some bloated program or a vital service. >> it doesn't make those distinctions. if congress allows this meat cleaver approach. >> people are getting hysterical. >> thousands of teachers will be laid off. >> the president is count iing the republicans again. >> the president promised it would happen, he is the commander-in-chief. >> he would like to replace it. he has not put details out there. >> there is a stalemate, just ten days -- >> these cuts are not fair. >> the sky is falling, the sky is falling. >> they don't have to happen. congress has to act. >>> tonight, another dramatic deadline is looming for the financing of the government of the united states of america. in just ten days, an unprecedented $1.2 trillion in spending cuts will begin to take effect. and you know what that means for congress? that is right, six more days left of recess. that leaves
be with regard to the economy and not both sides being able to go back to constituencies and say truthfully here's where i stood and it happened nevertheless. it benefits the republicans because their mantra is one of we are not going along with spending cuts without tax increases and we can't have tax increases on top of the 600 billion we went along with. the president made a pitch to independence by saying the word compromise. i'm for doing this in a manner that compromises. i think it's going to happen a week from friday without a vote and that is also to the benefit of the members because they won't be held accountable for it. >> is this the new normal that we came to expect? >> yes. >> how washington works and is it how our founding fathers designed our system to work? isn't there a catch 22 here as we beat congress over this and isn't this the way we were designed to work? >> i can't go that far back in history, but in modern times and the time i have been paying attention which is three decades, i don't think the polarization has been anything like it is today. this entire situation is r
or would they rather put hundreds of thousands of jobs and our entire economy at risk just to protect a few special interest tax loopholes that benefit only the wealthiest americans and biggest corporations? that is the choice. are you willing to see a bunch of first responders lose their job because you want to protect some special interest tax loophole? are you willing to have teachers laid off? or kids not have access to head-start? or deeper cuts in student loan programs? just because you want to protect a special tax interest loophole that the vast majority of americans don't benefit from. that's the choice. that's the question. and this is not an abstraction. there are people whose livelyhoods are at stake. they are communities that are going to be impacted in a negative way and i know that sometimes all of this squabbling in washington seems very abstract and in the abstract, people like the idea, you know, there must be some spending we can cut. there may be some waste out there. there absolutely is. but this isn't the right way to do it. so my door is open. i've put tough cuts and
that nobody expected to actually go into effect, it's bad management for the macro economy, for large programs, of course, but that said and the recent notes of the market freaking out, it is not doomsday. we have a tendency in washington of wildly overhyping everything we do. this is not like the debt ceiling or even the fiscal cliff. this is not doomsday even if it does happen. it's just stupid and we shouldn't do it. >> ezra, a couple of things here. first of all, for a long time, the stock market and the economy, as from the perspective of working people, have been at least two different things, correct? one thing, you can see the stock market doing fine. that might have a lot more to do with china than what is to happen march 1st. secondly, let's say nothing happens. the unemployment rate is stuck around 8%. this is a pretty lousy time for nothing to happen. in fact, if you look at the cbo projections, the projection with the sequester taking effect is for the unemployment rate to be 7.9% the first half of this year, 8% for the second half of this year. so, basically stuck at a place that
we all lived when the floor fell out of the 2008 economy. that was the detroit represented by the three big auto manufacturers whose failure would have symbolized to many of us the very failure of america, and that detroit as the obama for america campaign reminded us repeatedly, is now very much alive and kicking. but that detroit, the detroit we all want to see survive, exists in the entire country, not within any specific municipal bounds. then there is the literal detroit, the one where people live, the renaissance city founded initially in 1701. once it was a hub for mechanical manufacturing and detroit in the mid 20th century was a magnet for those looking for work. the city's population grew to more than 1.8 million residents in the 1950s. today, according to the latest census, detroit is the only -- the country's 18th largest city with just more than 700,000 inhabitants, for a city that covers almost 139 square miles. a space that san francisco, boston and manhattan could fit in with room to spare. there are so many factors contributing to the city's financial distr
the economy and jobs. there is, obviously, debate how many jobs have been created in the economy. look. you pointed out to apple tim cook in the audience in the state of the union and sitting on over $171 million in cash at apple. why? because uncertainty in the marketplace. tom friedman writing this morning something that caught my eye. he said you can feel the economy wants to launch but washington is sitting on the national mute button. we the people feel like the children of permanently divorcing parents. >> how does this sequester business end? the president said during the campaign the sequester, the word for automatic spending cuts, he said it would not happen. is it going to happen? >> i always read tom friedman has the good minnesota sensibility. the column today i think is continuation of that. frankly i believe a continuation of exactly the plan the president laid out in detail in the state of the union on tuesday night. we have already made 2.5 trillion dollars in deficit reduction efforts. we are going to -- we're ready as the president said in a very detailed way to make anoth
laid out for republicans. it's not just the economy that will suffer from the looming cuts next week. that's march 1st. national security will as well and it's seriously at risk. >> already the threat of these cuts has forced the navy to delay an aircraft carrier that was supposed to deploy to the persian gulf, and as our military leaders have made clear, changes like this, not well thought through, not phased in properly, changes like this affect our ability to respond to threats in unstable parts of the world. >> governor rendell, i just wonder what you think would be the situation, the scenario, if it comes to this. we pick up our paper some day and the newspaper said, carrier group can't make it to persian gulf for lack of funding. i mean, i just wonder if we're ready to face something -- i don't think we ever faced that in world war ii, in korea, in vietnam. we're unable to fight the wars we're in. >> chris, overall it's an incredibly bad situation for the country, and we can argue over who deserves the blame for this, and there's probably blame to go around, but right now the r
to market, but we also have to make our economy more efficient and use less oil. >> that was president obama in an interview yesterday answering a question about rising gas prices. his response illustrates a balancing act he faces on manager issues. moving towards energy independence and also addressing climate change concerns. nothing tests that balancing act more than the decision on the keystone xl pipeline. an approval the president delayed last year due to concerns over the pipeline ae environmental impact. the keystone is back on the table. the $7 billion project would build a 2,000 mile pipeline connecting canada's oil sands to refineries in texas and the gulf of mexico delivering more than 700,000 barrels of heavy crude oil into the country every day. president obama and the state department are expected to make a decision by the end of march, but it won't be easy. last weekend tens of thousands of environmentalists took to the streets of washington in what's being billed as the largest climate rally in u.s. history. opponents of the pipeline say that the extraction of the crude oil
that says great. let's have sequestration. let's cut $85 billion out of the economy. let's remove hope from the country. i doubt that you read that it said take hope out of the country and ruin the economy. but i get your point. what i find interesting in your argument, chris, is that you seem to overlook the fact that you have just as many democrats out there screaming the same thing on the left. starti ining howard deem. also, the whole idea of sequestration emanated -- >> what office does howard dean own? >> i'm just saying. you're pointing and say ing say >> it pushes both of these folks -- >> i'm sosh ri. i just want to check your facts. what democrats holding office in the congress want to see sequestration. >> the ones who voted for it. starting with them. you mean this whole thing got passed just on republican votes? >> it was called kicking the can -- >> are you kidding? >> i'm going to ask you again, do you believe right now there are any democrats in the house or senate who want to see sequestration? >> yes. >> name one. >> there have been folks on the record, chris. i can't name
are strong as a nation, and our economy is strong enough to recover from this piece by piece. what about that? >> well, this is where i would be critical of the president, ed. i think we would have faster economic recovery if we weren't laying off police officers and firefighters and school teachers all over the country. if you look at the reagan era, one of the things reagan did was a huge ramp-up when the economy was in trouble of government employees. but without question, the deficit is coming down to where it should be. which is slightly above spending or a balanced budget. it's going in that direction. the president has had the smallest growth in discretionary spending in numerous presidents as opposed to the big spender george w. bush who came ahead of him. >> dave, stay with us. i want to bring in steve benen, msnbc contributor. good to have you with us tonight. why are mainstream journalists repeating this lie about president obama not having a plan to replace sequester? >> well, i can only speculate about what brooks and others are thinking. but i would think in all likelihood, ther
. >> will it get done before the economy starts to feel the impact before thousands of people lose their jobs? >> it absolutely should. that would be the responsible thing to do. >> congressman joaquin castro, come back again, it's good to see you. >> i will. >> i want to play a part of what president obama said yesterday about the sequester. take say listen. >> border patrol agents will see their hours reduced. fbi agents will be furloughed. federal prosecutors will have to close cases and let criminals go. air traffic controllers and airport security will see cutbacks. >> the new york times did reporting and found that those things obviously may happen eventually, but march 1st is not going to be some date when all of a sudden everything happens. and they actually think many members of congress have more time to play with. how is that perception playing in to the sense of urgency on capitol hill? >> if the president isn't able to rally the public and build public opinion that this is a bad thing, it's going to be -- i think the public has been told the sky is falling a lot by this congress.
, but the most immediate priority i think is the economy. they're still struggling to keep a job or find a job. i think that is his top priority far and away, but he'll have to pursue other things at the same time. the good news is that is happening and i think it's happening successfully. we see is the congress coming together on immigration like it never has in my memory. we also see great progress i think on the gun issue with mushrooming of support for universal background checks. the good news is we'll be able to tackle many issues at the same time, but the president does have to prioritize the economy and that's what he's been doing. >> joe biden has been his point man. he'll be in connecticut today, pushing some gun legislation, but realistically, looking at the way congress has been and the dearth of pleasurements they've had in any significant way, do you really think that they can deal with with the sequester and gun control legislation passed as well at the same time? >> well, it's a heavy challenge. just the sequester, frankly, is the biggest because the gop is not of one mind but i t
the state of the economy, he probably should have lost and he won not just because of mitt romney's inadequacies, but because he built the finest political organization in recent american history with more than 1 million volunteers. >> you share that in common with barack obama. his hometown of chicago. your hometown is chicago. >> i met barack obama in 2002 and at that time he had just lost for the house of representatives. he told me when we first met when my aunt had died and he came over to pay respects to my cousin's house. he said he was going to run for the u.s. senate. i remember thinking, wow, that's a lot of nerve. he just lost for the house and he is running for the senate? yes, i knew him and i knew a lot of the people around him in chicago for many years because i grew up in chicago politics. my mother was a politician. my mother new barack obama in the '80s. so, you know, in some ways i'm familiar with the political environment that he came out of and i think that, you know, it's giving me a little bit more insight going back with these folks for quite a long period
's lead. republicans trying to tank the economy again. today president obama called out the gop for refusing to stop catastrophic budget cuts due to hit next friday. cuts that could derail our entire economy. these cuts were never supposed to have happened. they were designed to be so awful that even republicans would see the light in compromise on a budget deal before they could take effect. but the gop refused. >> these cuts are not smart. they are not fair. they will hurt our economy. they will add hundreds of thousands of americans to the unemployment rolls. this is not an abstraction. people will lose their jobs. >> people will lose their jobs. these cuts will effect huge parts of the economy. and cripple essential government services that millions of people rely on. >> emergency responders like the ones who are here today, their ability to help communities respond to and recover from disasters will be degraded. border patrol agents will see their hours reduced. fbi agents will be furloughed. federal prosecutors will have to close cases and let criminals go. air traffic con
hard and part of the economy. for those of us who fly you are going to have to adjust the schedule and reduce the number of flights. we will see the system remain safe, but boy i will tell you the lines when you travel are going to increase unless congress and the administration step up and they have this week to do it. so they could step into it and avert the sequester. >> thank you for joining us tonight. >>> let's play "hardball" ♪ >> it's a down and dirty world when youp decide shop cho ping the government is screw up traffic control, whatever raises the noise lefrl. bashes the democrats and lowers hope. is this what satisfies the boys in the back row? is this john boehner's version of feedings the zoo? is this final payment to insanity? the last ves taj of what calm republicanism is ready to cough up. how else can you let this frankenstein monster, this doomsday machine, this sequestration go ber circumto damage and mor real to the people. >>> gentlemen, i wrant to start with you, michael, because i know you'll disagree with me. i read a lot of reporting today that says grea
attention. >> that's what the economy said, herman. >> those that are wrong economists. >> please be reasonable. >> it makes me ashamed. >> vent your anger but be alone when you do it. ♪ have you heard about the new dance criaze ♪ li . >> it is seven days to austerity, to a potential economic apock lips when $85 billion will be slashed from the federal government and eventually it will affect all of us from the food we eat to the flights we take to the nation's national security. all of it could come apart unless republicans find a way to compromise on sequestration. it's a message the president reiterated this afternoon while meeting with japan's prime minister. >> this should be a no-brainer, and let me just point out that the overall impact to the economy will be to slow down the recovery. >> the comments came after transportation secretary ray lahood visited the white house briefing room this morning and explained in no uncertain terms how these cuts will affect the average american. he detailed not only the delays that travelers within the united states can expect, but al
that depend on it, or would they rather put hundreds of thousands of jobs and our entire economy at risk just to protect a few special interest tax loophole that is benefit only the wealthiest americans and biggest corporations? that's the choice. >> is there another way with only days to go before the automatic spending cuts kick in? re-enter the bipartisan budget cutters, the duo of simpson and bowles. >> there's no sfri in the country that makes cuts across the board. you try to cut those things that have the least adverse effect on productivity. second, we are cutting those areas where we actually need to invest education, infrastructure, research, and, third, they don't make any cuts in those things that are going faster than the economy. that's stupid, stupid, stupid. >> with us, former white house press secretary and a new msnbc contributor robert gibbs. cyber wars. china's army now targeting u.s. pipelines and nuclear plants. with us to discuss, the authors of a new report tracing the attacks to military headquarters in shanghai. plus, play of the day. while the press corps was banned
when we were trying to save the economy, until this time. and now that we are finally stumbling back from the depths of recession, we are still trying to cut government jobs. look at this, more than 70,000 government workers were canned when the recession began. the government sent 9,000 government workers home with a final paycheck, good luck, officer, see you around. so chart imitates life. we lionize and celebrate the people who fix the math, and rescue us from fires. we lionize and celebrate them justly as we should. and then in record numbers we can them, hurting them and us as a country. not every public sector worker is going to win the medal of valor like those at the white house today. but there is reason to appreciate them, both in the heroic and in the specific, and in the aggregate, for what they do for us every day. that does it for us, we'll see you tomorrow night, now it is time for "the last word" with lawrence o'donnell. >>> john boehner now claims he had nothing to do with the dreaded sequester, even though he voted for it. even some republicans are not letting him
people have been coming from mexico. and part of that is the bad economy in the u.s. there's just fewer jobs. part of that is a good economy in mexico. part of it's our enforcement. and of course, drug cartels and the drug war in mexico have played a huge role. >> but james, republicans are going to have to talk about border security, border security, border security to sell the other part of this. we saw john mccain and jeff flake, the two senators from arizona, having to sort of go back and forth and back and forth and slowly move their constituents along. and the way they do that is by talking tough on the border. >> yes. and this is politics playing out. right after the election, even sean hannity said well, maybe i'm for some kind of a border thing. the people in the republican party voting in these republican primaries, they're not sold on this. and i think senator mccain found that when he went back to arizona. it's going to happen time and time again. and they do have to bring them along. >> it's going to be tough in louisiana, too, isn't it? >> very. >> mary landrieu. is mary,
, even though republicans themselves admit those cuts would hurt our economy and endanger our national security. take a listen. >> you have really been strongly saying that we've got to overt where this is going. what can listeners around the country do to deal with this pending crisis. we're looking at eight days from now a major problem if we can't turn it around. >> so basically, what's happened is yeah, the republicans, back in 2011, threatened to default on the government paying its bills, unless we instituted a deficit reduction plan of $1.2 trillion. and what the deal was, the cuts were going to be so harmful, democrats and republicans would come together to find a more sensible way to reduce the debt with tax revenue and spending cuts. obviously, congress has not been able to make such progress. the republicans have said they don't want to do anymore revenue, even if it's just a matter of closing tax loopholes for some of the wealth yesz americans and well-connected corporations in the country. and so the danger is is that this will weaken the recovery. we'll see hundreds of th
get breaks. homosexual couples do not. it costs the economy because money that's going into extra taxes, into these other expenses could be going into the economy to benefit everybody. >> suze, i know you did a special on this on cnbc last summer, and kind of big head scratcher out of this was that gay and lesbian couples pay more in this country to be treated unequally. >> so does that make any sense? it doesn't make any sense anymore. listen, we are 2013, and the time has come now that doma is ended, that everybody is treated equal. there should be no financial inequalities anywhere. there should be no emotional inequalities. as the governor will tell you, he not only considers this a civil rights issue, but it also is a financial issue as well. this is the time now starting in march when we're going to hear these arguments starting in the supreme court that hopefully we can get everybody on board to understand that everybody financially in my opinion is getting hurt by this. not just gay couples. >> governor, i want to give you the last word, and you talked about how the econom
're going to cut everything right now, sequestration. it's going to slow down the economy. you've got democrats -- you've got the president running around because he only knows how to do one thing, ask for higher taxes. he's leading with the taxes. we've got to raise more taxes. it's the rich, it's the corporations, tax, tax, tax. i thought we had this debate before. democrats don't seem to understand that taxing americans dampens the economy, hurts small businesses, hurts a lot of americans. republicans don't seem to understand that massive unfocused cuts right now are going to slow down the economy and hurt americans, too. >> you seriously have to wonder whether anyone in washington, in the house, in the senate, in the white house, in the administration, republican, democrat, do they ever go outdoors? do they ever see what happens every day to ordinary americans? people who have been getting crushed economically for the past 10 or 15 years are now getting crushed again, doubly so. the payroll tax has been eliminated. have you checked out the price of gasoline over the past couple of
and a lot of damage to the economy. but because it's slower moving, there seems to be less impetus to get a deal done before the march 1st deadline. you're hearing maybe this would all be wrapped up and the continuing spending resolution, if that's not solved by the end of march could result in a government shutdown. there seems to be posturing for negotiating all at once, some time in march. looks like it's possible we'll go past the sequester. >> didn't the gop agree to the sequester deal? and if the gop wanted to stop it, they could have. how do you assess blaming the president for the sequester? >> i'm not sure that's really working out for them because it's true that both sides agreed to this. and now the president is saying, okay, i agreed to this but let's do something about it. the whole idea of the sequester is it would be such a bad thing that neither party would want to go through with it. we can disagree with the logic of even setting this up. but it is true that if you're the party that's refusing to do the negotiation, i think you're the one that looks bad. the fact that bot
that is effectively transferring money from savers to prop up these banks. that's the real impact to our economy. that's why pension funds are in trouble. it's a real fundamental problem here. >> but we can put on the table both you experts. we've got a senator from massachusetts who is should we say unspoiled and ready to do the work of the people on the banking committee. fair enough? >> absolutely. >> it's going to be fun. martin smith, david cay johnston, great to have you with us tonight. >>> remember to answer tonight's question there at the bottom of the screen. share your thoughts with us on twitter and at ed show on facebook. we want to know what you think. >>> ten years ago, the bush administration lied us into a war. rachel maddow and david corn are here to preview their new special that will make you really look at this story in a whole new different way. stay with us. back at where we'v. it has an enormous windshield so we can look ahead to where we are going. now is always the time to go forward. and reimagine all the possibilities that lie before us. an ally for real possibilities. aarp
're not necessary. they'll hurt our economy. they'll raise the unemployment rate. and the reason is because congress has not been able to compromise on a deficit reduction package that's more sensible. >> yesterday the president insisted sudden across-the-board spending cuts would be unnecessary and damaging and he made sure that first responders were there to punctuate the message. let's watch and listen. >> border patrol agents will see their hours reduced. fbi agents will be furloughed. federal prosecutors will have to close cases and let criminals go. air traffic controllers and airport security will see cutbacks, which means more delays at airports across the country. thousands of teachers and educators will be laid off. >> and keeping up the drum beat, house minority leader nancy pelosi will hold hearings on how middle class families could be hurt by the spending cuts that could kick in march 1st. joining me is u.s. congressman adam shiff of california. i was so impressed by the way you explained all of this this morning on msnbc. i'd like you to do it again. your take on what this fight is ab
the republicans will allow the sequestration into effect. >> they're not necessary. they'll hurt our economy, they'll raise the unemployment rate, and the reason is because congress has in the been able to compromise on a deficit reduction package that's more sensible. ♪ >>> we start with the president who today reached out to republican leaders in congress with just eight days to go before tens of millions of dollars in brutal budget cuts will take effect. and we can only hope that for the sake of the country, republicans have started to listen. because polls out today show that the american people certainly favor the president's approach to the so-called sequester on march 1st. but they find the republican position about as popular as karl rove at a tea party event and that's because this budget battle sounds very familiar. and that's why the president is reaching exactly the same message on these cuts that he campaigned on last year. >> they're not necessary. they'll hurt our economy. they'll raise the unemployment rate, and the reason is because congress has not been able to compromise on a
for the economy t's not going to be good for ordinary people. but i don't know if they're going to move. >> the president did reach across the aisle this week most recently dialing up house speaker john boehner and senate minority leader mitch mcconnell yesterday. we don't know what was said in those calls, but we do know they didn't result in new meetings between the president and congressional leaders. both sides instead focusing on dominating this debate. >> democrats don't seem to understand that taxing americans dampens the economy. republicans don't seem to understand that massive unfocused cuts right now are going to slow down the economy. >> you seriously have to wonder whether anyone in washington, in the house and the senate, in the white house and the administration, republican, democrat, do they ever go outdoors? >> so the economic hammer falling at the end of the month. $85 billion in cuts. what will that mean to your wallet or your family? $619 million in cuts to the federal aviation administration which could result in major flight delays for travelers. $406 million in cu
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 112 (some duplicates have been removed)